Mahatma Gandhi, without a shred of doubt. He brought India out of 1000 yrs of slavery. 500-600yrs of slavery under various muslim kings, then 300 yrs of slavery under brits and french. Gandhi gave a new lease of life to India.

Click to expand...

That is a serious misconception what every one used to believe.
The fact that brits left india is not because Gandhi protested with his dothi.
After WWII the brits economy went into shambles and They dont see anything else left in India to ROB.
At the same time the Administration costs are showing up more than the profits they are incurring by the import export of raw materials,goods products,......
The blood for blood movement is taking its toll on the birts.
And more over, they are being suspicious of Netaji striking back will full revenge.
After analysing all the pros and cons,they felt it better to not take any more risk which is not worth the money they rob from indians

If there was no WWII,Brits would never had left India even after 100 such Gandhi`s come and do satyagrahas.:twizt:

That is a serious misconception what every one used to believe.
The fact that brits left india is not because Gandhi protested with his dothi.
After WWII the brits economy went into shambles and They dont see anything else left in India to ROB.
At the same time the Administration costs are showing up more than the profits they are incurring by the import export of raw materials,goods products,......
The blood for blood movement is taking its toll on the birts.
And more over, they are being suspicious of Netaji striking back will full revenge.
After analysing all the pros and cons,they felt it better to not take any more risk which is not worth the money they rob from indians

If there was no WWII,Brits would never had left India even after 100 such Gandhi`s come and do satyagrahas.:twizt:

Click to expand...

Misconception??? I never seen anyone to explain critical things so simply. (And ofcourse with the mind set up whatever i know is fact...other things r rubish)

Misconception??? I never seen anyone to explain critical things so simply. (And ofcourse with the mind set up whatever i know is fact...other things r rubish)

Click to expand...

Then ,you think that the brits just left with the fear of Gandhi organizing more n more satyagrahas?
I can clearly see the current state of affairs that reflects the mind state of those so called Gandhi`s and jagirdhars.

Mentioning again: NO WWII,NO independence for india under Gandhi led non-violence movement.

In my words, both Gandhi and Jinnah are diff.Just took the advantage of receding brits. Period.

And who is going to explain you more clearly? Congress.
A freedom movement turned into political party?
Over the years,these congress people are doing good in misleading history and the past.And they will rejoice as long as folks like you support them and wave their tri color flag(which is again copied national flag with my had instead of an Ashoka Chakra)

Then ,you think that the brits just left with the fear of Gandhi organizing more n more satyagrahas?
I can clearly see the current state of affairs that reflects the mind state of those so called Gandhi`s and jagirdhars.

Mentioning again: NO WWII,NO independence for india under Gandhi led non-violence movement.

In my words, both Gandhi and Jinnah are diff.Just took the advantage of receding brits. Period.

And who is going to explain you more clearly? Congress.
A freedom movement turned into political party?
Over the years,these congress people are doing good in misleading history and the past.And they will rejoice as long as folks like you support them and wave their tri color flag(which is again copied national flag with my had instead of an Ashoka Chakra)

Click to expand...

Mate, you need some serious reality check. No individual is perfect, but it is the biggest lie that Mahatma Gandhi took advantage of receding British. You need to go back to History books and do some research. Before making any allegation you must have some valid reason to justify that.

How many people in this earth have the guts to admit their own mistakes? Please read the autobiography of Mahatma Gandhi.

Mahatma Gandhi had asked Congress to dissolve the party after India got its independence. Check it mate. You simply cannot blame Mahatma Gandhi for the act of Present Congress leadership.

Nobody is asking you to have Mahatma Gandhi as your hero. But please don’t disrespect him.

Then ,you think that the brits just left with the fear of Gandhi organizing more n more satyagrahas?
I can clearly see the current state of affairs that reflects the mind state of those so called Gandhi`s and jagirdhars.

Mentioning again: NO WWII,NO independence for india under Gandhi led non-violence movement.

In my words, both Gandhi and Jinnah are diff.Just took the advantage of receding brits. Period.

And who is going to explain you more clearly? Congress.
A freedom movement turned into political party?
Over the years,these congress people are doing good in misleading history and the past.And they will rejoice as long as folks like you support them and wave their tri color flag(which is again copied national flag with my had instead of an Ashoka Chakra)

Click to expand...

Exmaples how queekly you make your opinion-

1) To admire Gandhi one needs not to be a Congress Supporter (And i am not too). Do you know the person in your avatar remained a great admirer of Gandhi through out his life even when their belief contradicted and he left Congress. You must agree Subhash Chandra Bose has seen Gandhi more closely than you. And Gandhi's contribution in humanity is not limited within our strugle for freedom.

1) To admire Gandhi one needs not to be a Congress Supporter (And i am not too). Do you know the person in your avatar remained a great admirer of Gandhi through out his life even when their belief contradicted and he left Congress. You must agree Subhash Chandra Bose has seen Gandhi more closely than you. And Gandhi's contribution in humanity is not limited within our strugle for freedom.

2) which one came first- Congress tri-colour or indian national flag?

Click to expand...

I make my point again, the history books that we have read right from child-hood have always meant to glorify Gandhi and Congress, while Subhash Bose gets little credit, since they were written by pro-congress educationists. What has Congress's vote-bank strategy of reservation achieved so far? When the need for it should be ideally decreasing, they increase it.

Also, we Indians cannot seem to be able to come out of dynasty rule, as the Gandhi dynasty is still ruling us. Running India has become a family business.

The greatest effect Netaji had on the British was not due to direct actions by him but rather indirectly, WW2 was the first and last time in modern history that two armies representing the same nation fought each other(barring civil wars).The INA changed forever the outlook many Indian military officers and soldiers had towards the British. When the INA trials were held this camaraderie between these forces was shown in the way many Indian army & navy troops revolted against their British officers more on this is below

Beyond the concurrent campaigns of noncooperation and nonviolent protest, this spread to include mutinies and wavering support within the British Indian Army. This movement marked the last major campaign in which the forces of the Congress and the Muslim League aligned together; the Congress tricolor and the green flag of the League were flown together at protests. In spite of this aggressive and widespread opposition, the court martial was carried out, and all three defendants were sentenced to deportation for life. This sentence, however, was never carried out, as the immense public pressure of the demonstrations forced Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Army, to release all three defendants.During the trial, mutiny broke out in the Royal Indian Navy, incorporating ships and shore establishments of the RIN throughout India, from Karachi to Bombay and from Vizag to Calcutta. The most significant, if disconcerting factor for the Raj, was the significant militant public support that it received. At some places, NCOs in the British Indian Army started ignoring orders from British superiors. In Madras and Pune, the British garrisons had to face revolts within the ranks of the British Indian Army.
Another Army mutiny took place at Jabalpur during the last week of February 1946, soon after the Navy mutiny at Bombay. This was suppressed by force, including the use of the bayonet by British troops. It lasted about two weeks. After the mutiny, about 45 persons were tried by court martial. 41 were sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment or dismissal. In addition, a large number were discharged on administrative grounds. While the participants of the Naval Mutiny were given the freedom fighters' pension, the Jabalpur mutineers got nothing. They even lost their service pension.Reflecting on the factors that guided the British decision to relinquish the Raj in India, Clement Attlee, the then British prime minister, cited several reasons, the most important of which were the INA activities of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, which weakened the Indian Army - the foundation of the British Empire in India- and the RIN Mutiny that made the British realise that the Indian armed forces could no longer be trusted to prop up the Raj.[2]]. Although Britain had made, at the time of the Cripps' mission in 1942, a commitment[3] to grant dominion status[4] to India after the war this suggests that, contrary to the usual narrative of India's independence struggle, (which generally focuses on Congress and Mahatma Gandhi), the INA and the revolts, mutinies, and public resentment it germinated were an important factor in the complete withdrawal of the Raj from India.

Mate, you need some serious reality check. No individual is perfect, but it is the biggest lie that Mahatma Gandhi took advantage of receding British. You need to go back to History books and do some research. Before making any allegation you must have some valid reason to justify that.

How many people in this earth have the guts to admit their own mistakes? Please read the autobiography of Mahatma Gandhi.

Mahatma Gandhi had asked Congress to dissolve the party after India got its independence. Check it mate. You simply cannot blame Mahatma Gandhi for the act of Present Congress leadership.

Nobody is asking you to have Mahatma Gandhi as your hero. But please don’t disrespect him.

Sorry for off topic post.

Click to expand...

It is BULLSH!T
I have no personal grudge or dis-opinion on anyone ,including you.
But take it ,That Gandhi served the nation as being a better politician than being a freedom fighter.
Untill my 10th grade I used to believe everything that was written in textbooks by the most dim-wit congress leaders .It is only in my 11th grade when I had to go and meet my match Lecturer in need of a text book and unintentionally meet his grandfather who is really old and need someone to help him out to do his routine things.This old person was a freedom fighter.He narrated his story ,how he started fighting the brits by joining the non-violence movement and latter due to the difference in ideology that didnt go well with the top brass of the so called bullshitter's and crappy non-violence movement ,he was forced by his himself to take part in the Netaji led INA to fight the british.
I am not sure if he is still alive today,because It was very very long time back I met him.And he never was after those freedom fighter finds and crap.He did refused to use the Indian currency that has Gandhi imprints.
I rather believe his words than the ones written by some crooky politicians.
It is in his own words that Gandhi has a multi personal disorder which made him behave like a saviour of the nation infront of public and as a witty *****yy politicians behind the walls.Just after walking out of the room,gandhis personality and body language changes which no one expects.

But the only one thing I like about gandhi is,He loved himself being a mentor(what ever the substance is) and is not interested in power.He ought to be behind the curtains while having Nehru and co on the stage when political maneuvers are concerned.When coming to public,he loved people praising him and like to occupy the stage.What kind of personality is that?????

He is a big egoistic and pseudo secularist.He discriminates people.........

If he wasnt kicked out from the train in which he was journeying in S.A,the wouldnt have took the oath for those black africans.Since he was considered as one among them, his ego was hurted and since himself was being discriminated he started the movement there.Instead ,if the white africans didnt showed discrimination on him and shouldnt have kicked him out of the train,he would have been far happier with the treatment he received.

And his discrimination of his followers under the banner of Non-violence movement is a multi spectrum.
When Motilal wanted to retire from the Presidency of Indian National Congress and is looking for candidates outside his family and at the time, when he almost circled few capable persons, Gandhi intervened and persuaded Motilal to get his son Nehru.A reluctant Motilal who thought the movement will loose its value if the successor is picked from his blood was persuaded by Gandhi in numerous ways.And finally brought Motilal to a condition that If Nehru satisfies and obliges the qualities for being a President then you can make him the successor.In the mean time Gandhi made Nehru participate in numerous movements so that Motilal can take notice of his actions in the next 2 years which is actually the time sought by Gandhi from Motilal .
with the main followers knowing this crook mentality ,few deserted the movement and joined the INA and others initiated their own.
For the folks here, this is just a sample to characterize Gandhi.Since the time wont permit me to write his actual biography again,I will take leave by only highlighting few major incidents when time comes.

And for people talking of history books,Which history books you read?
for sure they has to be the ones written by these congress people.Even after 65 years, people are failing to realize the facts and living in a fools paradise where Gandhi,Nehru,... are the rulers.

And to talk about Nehru?? My rest of the life wont permit.
He is obsessed with succession from his own family.since Indira is the only heir,the intended to make her the next PM.Since the party and folks around will definitely take a bold note of his actions,he got just 2 scape goats named after Sastri and Desai.
Desai being a reluctant to Nehrus own ideologies was being held at a distance ,while Sastri was nurtured as a counter act to Desai.
Did anyone ever wondered about the Kamaraj`s policy?
It is that," All leaders who ever are currently held as being ministers has to resign their respective offices and has to work as mentors for the sake of PARTY(but not for the country damit)
this made every one including Desai and Sastri,Kamraj and numerous others resign their jobs.While a possible sucessor like Desai was removed from power with a simple mandate, Sasthri was given few powers according to the wish of Nehru.
Hence Desai was eliminated as a possible contender.But Nehru who knows Sasthri more than himself has a cruel intention in his mind.Sasthri was a heart patient which only few people close to Sasthri knows that.You can get Sasthri a PM chair for time being untill the typhoon of political rivalry recedes.And one more heart attack? Sasthri will be history.Then there will be a red carpet waiting for Indira.and everything happened as per the plan A of Nehru.
And folks call these bunch of retarded politicians as FREEDOM FIGHTERS??? Simply outrageous.

1) To admire Gandhi one needs not to be a Congress Supporter (And i am not too). Do you know the person in your avatar remained a great admirer of Gandhi through out his life even when their belief contradicted and he left Congress. You must agree Subhash Chandra Bose has seen Gandhi more closely than you. And Gandhi's contribution in humanity is not limited within our strugle for freedom.

2) which one came first- Congress tri-colour or indian national flag?

Click to expand...

Valmiki used to hunt for living.And after moksha he wrote Ramayan.
I only value the end product,i.e the fruit,but not how the tree was grown.

I agree that Netaji knows Gandhi more than me.which could be reason Netaji has to go with INA.

Can you give me a brief details of his crookedness contributions to man kind?I would be glad if you can thow few related to India other the politicized freedom movement.
If he is sooo goood as alike what people conceive here, he shouldnt have been assassinated.
No one like to take their grude on people who did most to the mankind.
I know that my opinions differ the most than the most text book readers here.But I am proud of what I am and being an Indian,but not a politician.

Before anyone starts the debate, I would like to request him/her to go though these two articles (which BTW are too big to post here) because this is not to be taken lightly. We are discussing the "Father of the Nation" here.

That Gandhi served the nation as being a better politician than being a freedom fighter.
Untill my 10th grade I used to believe everything that was written in textbooks by the most dim-wit congress leaders .It is only in my 11th grade when I had to go and meet my match Lecturer in need of a text book and unintentionally meet his grandfather who is really old and need someone to help him out to do his routine things.This old person was a freedom fighter.He narrated his story ,how he started fighting the brits by joining the non-violence movement and latter due to the difference in ideology that didnt go well with the top brass of the so called bullshitter's and crappy non-violence movement ,he was forced by his himself to take part in the Netaji led INA to fight the british.
I am not sure if he is still alive today,because It was very very long time back I met him.And he never was after those freedom fighter finds and crap.He did refused to use the Indian currency that has Gandhi imprints.
I rather believe his words than the ones written by some crooky politicians.
It is in his own words that Gandhi has a multi personal disorder which made him behave like a saviour of the nation infront of public and as a witty *****yy politicians behind the walls.Just after walking out of the room,gandhis personality and body language changes which no one expects.

He is a big egoistic and pseudo secularist.He discriminates people.........

Click to expand...

Is it your personal view or that of someone closely associated with gandhiji? If it is your personal view I have no problem. You are entitled to that. But your personal view does not prove those adjectives about Gandhiji. If someone who was closely associated with him have written this than kindly provide the link.

If he wasnt kicked out from the train in which he was journeying in S.A,the wouldnt have took the oath for those black africans.Since he was considered as one among them, his ego was hurted and since himself was being discriminated he started the movement there.Instead ,if the white africans didnt showed discrimination on him and shouldnt have kicked him out of the train,he would have been far happier with the treatment he received.

Click to expand...

How many people are kicked out and humiliated everyday all around the globe. How many Mahatma Gandhi or Nelson Mandela do we have at this moment?

Rest of your post is your own view. I have no problem with your personal view. But cooked up stories influenced by reading something is not facts about Gandhiji. If you want a proper debate you must back up your views by some facts.

i can't believe what i'm reading,mahatma gandhi played the biggest part in the freedom struggle.1 man united all india in a struggle for self rule.

People the world over regard gandhi as the greatest man of the last cenutury,so to see his greatest achivement a free india .Being able to rule her people for her own benifit,and not for the benifit of others.

Gandhi is the father of the country and his method of using ahimsa may have been the wisest choice in his circumstances and the state of the nation at that time to attain liberation, but the use of ahimsa has the world viewing India as a "soft power" if this is good or not is debatedable, but a violent liberation movement have have taken the country down a different course and may not have achieved the same result. The country was being divided by foreigners any movement that increased the violence that already existed at that time would have only created further bloodbath in the greatest migration and violence in recent recorded history.

Please let us know the political posts held by Gandhiji pre and post independence.

Stop your fairy tells and provide some source to back up your claim.

Is it your personal view or that of someone closely associated with gandhiji? If it is your personal view I have no problem. You are entitled to that. But your personal view does not prove those adjectives about Gandhiji. If someone who was closely associated with him have written this than kindly provide the link.

How many people are kicked out and humiliated everyday all around the globe. How many Mahatma Gandhi or Nelson Mandela do we have at this moment?

Rest of your post is your own view. I have no problem with your personal view. But cooked up stories influenced by reading something is not facts about Gandhiji. If you want a proper debate you must back up your views by some facts.

Click to expand...

Desperation?
If you can take them granted for what ever that so called Indian National Congress writes and preaches,It dont necessarily mean that the rest have to follow.

And to clear that sort of mis-conception in ur mind,None of these opinions are my personal since ,I never had a chance to meet Gandhi in person.
A vast of these are due to my interaction with the REAL freedom fighters who actually participated in the freedom movement against the british ,but unfortunately failed to get their name in the congress news paper.
Congress news paper was an utterly biased and is a propaganda tool used by Congress and to get hold of the masses.
I know people simply may not digest the utter facts after being digested with the propaganda thats been injected for more than 60 years.
Even if you dont realize which is fact and which is propaganda,you will be living in that congress created fantasy world for ever untill you end of life.

And the mere fact is that, Even IF I do provide a video clipping of Gandhi hitting a backward tribe with his sandal,people will simply reject it on the basis that it is a graphic.That propaganda machine worked well in the Indian context and those lies and dis-beliefs were deep rooted into the Indian Teens.
Unless a change in government occurs which can publish a fact based history instead of a propaganda based one, the later generations will get carried with the same illusion.

To start with,Gandhi had a stake in the S.A movement,but which purely a rasicm based.And the Blacks were saved from being cremated, because there were substantial numbers of other populations(indians,dutch,african blacks,...) And I would like to point that ,In his 20+ Years of stay ,he never get into a social contact byself with any sub-caste/tribe.
And the south african movement gave credit to gandhi for no reason.
And few examples of his racism: The Truth Seeker - The Myth of Mahatma GandhiGandhi apologists indulged in gross deception by claiming that Gandhi’s Satyagrah in South Africa was in the defense of the rights of native people. Nothing could be further from truth than this bald lie. How could Gandhi, a diehard supporter of the caste system think of the welfare of African blacks he regarded lower than the Untouchables of India - slightly above the animal level? His Satyagrah was for the better treatment of Indians, who, according to Gandhi were treated the same way as savage Kaffirs (native people) were. In his stay of twenty years in South Africa, he had no social contacts with the Kaffirs, as he did not see any common ground with them in the daily affairs of life. He was horrified when he was lodged with "natives" in the same jail ward. He did not like wearing the same clothes with label "N" born by the natives, nor he liked their food and sharing lavatory with them. It was the jail experience, which brought out his racism in the open. " Kaffir and Chinese prisoners are wild, murderous and given to immoral ways. Kaffirs are as a general rule uncivilized – the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animal."Gandhi: Behind the Mask of Divinity
Gandhi infact was no saviour of Blacks.He just want the whites to treat indians kinda better rather that treating them similar to blacks.

Wonder....An Indian patriot working for British Indian Army and led life as a stretch carrier in the Boers War of 1900.
Need more details? Read the Boers War And Gandhi by a Dutch Writer.Forgot his name(since I read it very long time back)

And Now Lets accept the fact that Gandhi is half brit and half Indian.
His education and living in England made him half british and an added impetus is that he inherited their ethical values too.

And lets go through his Indian Drama:

It is simply not true that India's Independence was the fruit of Gandhian non-violent agitation. He was close to the British in terms of culture and shared ethical values, which is why sometimes he could successfully bargain with them, but even they stood firm against his pressure when their vital interests were at stake. It is only Britain's bankruptcy due to World War 2 and the emergence of the anti-colonial United States and Soviet Union as the dominant world powers that forced Clement Attlee's government into decolonizing India.Even then, the trigger events in 1945-47 that demonstrated how the Indian people would not tolerate British rule for much longer, had to do with armed struggle rather than with non-violence: the naval mutiny of Indian troops and the ostentatious nationwide support for the officers of Subhas Bose's Axis-collaborationist Indian National Army when they stood trial for treason in the Red FortLearning from Mahatma Gandhi's mistakes
Just simply dont make him a god for doing an immaterial work in relevance to freedom movement.
What ever has Gandhi did in relative to Non-violence,It only hurted the Indians and Indian Interests, but failed to take a shot on brits.

The Russian Revolution of 1914 spurted national movements against colonial rule. The British brought Gandhi back to India to sabotage Indian national movement against British rule. The congress Party dominated by Gandhi was set up under the patronage of the British authorities. The "apostle of peace" urged the Indian people to support the British by enlisting in the army during World War I. In his letter he wrote to the Viceroy in1930, he said, " One of his reason for launching the Civil Disobedient Movement is to contain the violence of revolutionaries."

Sometimes,It does makes me believe that Brits sent him back to india from S.A to downgrade the freedom movement(only a belief,since I dont have any proofs to attest)

And please Go through this book:
Dynasties of India and Beyond Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh by Inder Malhotra.( you can get it from any central library ) or else if you wanna wait for the copies? Dynasties of India and Beyond Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh - Inder Malhotra, HB - Books Buy Dynasties of India and Beyond Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh India - Infibeam.com
there were lot of sections in this book that highlights the true mentality and the actual political movement behind the screens of Freedom movement.
It does talks a lot about your great chicha Nehru and how he lost the 62 war.
62 War was actually a timed action by Mao.When Nehru is scrambling to find ways to host his daughter as the next successor and is bringing as many changes in politics and admin rules,and ignored the russians and Shastri`s words regarding China.
Frankly speaking, this Indian national congress led non-voilence movement is a farse in the history of India. And Hatts-off to the believers of Gandi Nehru.

And the most debatable part is the Gandhi-Ambedkhar.Dont want to flood the forum with 1000000 of links related to that.And It is advisable to take help of google/Bing/Live Search/Yahoo gurus.

P.S: I clearly believe that I am going against the odds who are in a deep perception that Gandhi( a historical artifact) is the main cause for Freedom movement.The statements in the quotes are only meant to be for sample purposes.And Go though the links to get hold of more information.Since most of the books which I read are not available online,I may have to back-off a bit and seek more time to find the online editions.An additional advice is that,since the independence it is only congress ruling the nation and it is only those belong to congress publishing these books and were 100% biased IMHO.

Gandhi is the father of the country and his method of using ahimsa may have been the wisest choice in his circumstances and the state of the nation at that time to attain liberation, but the use of ahimsa has the world viewing India as a "soft power" if this is good or not is debatedable, but a violent liberation movement have have taken the country down a different course and may not have achieved the same result. The country was being divided by foreigners any movement that increased the violence that already existed at that time would have only created further bloodbath in the greatest migration and violence in recent recorded history.

Click to expand...

Mate, I got your point.but we have to consolidate the facts which were mostly covered up by the propaganda.
Who gave Gandhi the father of nation title? Lol.......its the Congress.
If one can consolidate both the gains and losses involved in both kind of movements,
the non-violence takes more shots and losses.You will be looked by enemy as an impotent.And hence the brits went on raping spree of Indian women whose husbands and fathers were standing outside the doors holding a white flag calling for peace.

And more over,its a worldwide belief that,
You only opt for non-violence only under 2 main conditions:
either you feel that you are relative weaker and fear the enemy or you being an impotent.Now tell me, which one suits this non-violence movement?

Gandhi got his label from the Congress party, the same party that made Nehru the Prime minister and the same party that did little to nothing to stop the partition and do little to end the Kashmir issue,many claim it was England's economic position and ww2 that brought the end of the raj and not anything special that Gandhi or Nehru did, I respect Gandhi but the real fathers of the country are Bose and Sardar Patel both who wanted independence without division, the partition was more or less punishment and carving out a strategic territory for the West. A violent independence would have been more ideal it may have united hindus and muslims against a common enemy the British and changed the way the world views us currently as a soft power, it would have gave us access to Central Asia and there probably would be no border issues or terrorism. If small nations like Vietnam libya and Algeria could violently overthrow their colonial rulers for us to be nice to our colonial rulers to give independence is an injustice to Indians by the rulers for allowing the centuries of pillaging by the invaders and being able to leave unscathed.

Mate, I got your point.but we have to consolidate the facts which were mostly covered up by the propaganda.
Who gave Gandhi the father of nation title? Lol.......its the Congress.
If one can consolidate both the gains and losses involved in both kind of movements,
the non-violence takes more shots and losses.You will be looked by enemy as an impotent.And hence the brits went on raping spree of Indian women whose husbands and fathers were standing outside the doors holding a white flag calling for peace.

And more over,its a worldwide belief that,
You only opt for non-violence only under 2 main conditions:
either you feel that you are relative weaker and fear the enemy or you being an impotent.Now tell me, which one suits this non-violence movement?

Click to expand...

Mate, it is wrong to term followers of non-violence as weak hearts. In my opinion it is much easier to explode when you are tortured and opressed.But to keep on non-violently you not only need to be tolerent and painstaking, you also need to curb the uprising inside you. Gandhi did not support freedom fighters like Bhagat Singh on the basis of ideology. If he were a cheap politician, I am sure he would have not missed the opportunity. he could have easily utilise Bhagat Singh's sacrifice dropping his own path of Ahimsa...(though it was proved later that even Bhagat Singh's protest did not mean to kill anybody)
Can anyone tell ' what Mahatma Gandhi was doing when we got our independence in the midnight of 15th August, 1947...instead of posing infront of world
media.... Do search a bit....

No...I am not saying Gandhi alone gave us Freedom. Thousands and millions (we perhaps never heard of most of them) made sacrifice. i am just against to measure their sacrifice in quantitive term.

I am agreed with Emperor and Kommie...that we have stuffed our heads with the writing of pro-cong historians. Now please explain how The person named Gandhi so successfully brought millions of Indians (of different race, religion and language) to a path of Ahimsa which in our opinion is nothing but stupidity. Pro-cong history books were not written then. Even if you dont want to respect Gandhi dont do that..but dont insult millions of Indians who came on road to struggle....

And to clear that sort of mis-conception in ur mind,None of these opinions are my personal since ,I never had a chance to meet Gandhi in person.
A vast of these are due to my interaction with the REAL freedom fighters who actually participated in the freedom movement against the british ,but unfortunately failed to get their name in the congress news paper.
Congress news paper was an utterly biased and is a propaganda tool used by Congress and to get hold of the masses.
I know people simply may not digest the utter facts after being digested with the propaganda thats been injected for more than 60 years.
Even if you dont realize which is fact and which is propaganda,you will be living in that congress created fantasy world for ever untill you end of life.

And the mere fact is that, Even IF I do provide a video clipping of Gandhi hitting a backward tribe with his sandal,people will simply reject it on the basis that it is a graphic.That propaganda machine worked well in the Indian context and those lies and dis-beliefs were deep rooted into the Indian Teens.
Unless a change in government occurs which can publish a fact based history instead of a propaganda based one, the later generations will get carried with the same illusion.

Click to expand...

Again you are ready with your own fairy tell. Just post the video instead of taking rubbish.

To start with,Gandhi had a stake in the S.A movement,but which purely a rasicm based.And the Blacks were saved from being cremated, because there were substantial numbers of other populations(indians,dutch,african blacks,...) And I would like to point that ,In his 20+ Years of stay ,he never get into a social contact byself with any sub-caste/tribe.
And the south african movement gave credit to gandhi for no reason.
And few examples of his racism: The Truth Seeker - The Myth of Mahatma Gandhi
Gandhi apologists indulged in gross deception by claiming that Gandhi’s Satyagrah in South Africa was in the defense of the rights of native people. Nothing could be further from truth than this bald lie. How could Gandhi, a diehard supporter of the caste system think of the welfare of African blacks he regarded lower than the Untouchables of India - slightly above the animal level? His Satyagrah was for the better treatment of Indians, who, according to Gandhi were treated the same way as savage Kaffirs (native people) were. In his stay of twenty years in South Africa, he had no social contacts with the Kaffirs, as he did not see any common ground with them in the daily affairs of life. He was horrified when he was lodged with "natives" in the same jail ward. He did not like wearing the same clothes with label "N" born by the natives, nor he liked their food and sharing lavatory with them. It was the jail experience, which brought out his racism in the open. " Kaffir and Chinese prisoners are wild, murderous and given to immoral ways. Kaffirs are as a general rule uncivilized – the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animal."
Gandhi: Behind the Mask of Divinity
Gandhi infact was no saviour of Blacks.He just want the whites to treat indians kinda better rather that treating them similar to blacks.

Click to expand...

Read the thread title. It says “Role of MK Gandhi in India Freedom struggle. So stick to the topic. If you want to discuss about his role in South Africa open another thread.

Who is this G B Singh? Must be someone like you. Who has made his own assumption by reading some article on Gandhiji.

Wonder....An Indian patriot working for British Indian Army and led life as a stretch carrier in the Boers War of 1900.
Need more details? Read the Boers War And Gandhi by a Dutch Writer.Forgot his name(since I read it very long time back)

And Now Lets accept the fact that Gandhi is half brit and half Indian.
His education and living in England made him half british and an added impetus is that he inherited their ethical values too.

Click to expand...

You should be immediately appointed as an immigration officer on special duty at MEA (GOI). You have a great understanding of who is a half Indian and who is not.
As per you Amartya Sen, APJ Abdul Kalam, Pandit Ravi Shankar are all half Indian. You are making yourself a laughing stock.

It is simply not true that India's Independence was the fruit of Gandhian non-violent agitation. He was close to the British in terms of culture and shared ethical values, which is why sometimes he could successfully bargain with them, but even they stood firm against his pressure when their vital interests were at stake. It is only Britain's bankruptcy due to World War 2 and the emergence of the anti-colonial United States and Soviet Union as the dominant world powers that forced Clement Attlee's government into decolonizing India.Even then, the trigger events in 1945-47 that demonstrated how the Indian people would not tolerate British rule for much longer, had to do with armed struggle rather than with non-violence: the naval mutiny of Indian troops and the ostentatious nationwide support for the officers of Subhas Bose's Axis-collaborationist Indian National Army when they stood trial for treason in the Red Fort
Learning from Mahatma Gandhi's mistakes
Just simply dont make him a god for doing an immaterial work in relevance to freedom movement.
What ever has Gandhi did in relative to Non-violence,It only hurted the Indians and Indian Interests, but failed to take a shot on brits.

Click to expand...

Here comes Dr. Koenraad Elst with his own twist to the story. It will be better if you quote someone like Sarad Patel, Maulana Azad, Subash Chandra Bose, Bal Gangadhar Tilak or anyone associated with Indian Freedom movement.

According to me , role of mk gandhi is a bit crucial in indian freedom movement.
for sure that he is unique from others his rules and poilicies were good comparitively but at the same time took many lives . he did many things for his own benefit without thinking about future , one best example i can give is partition . he gave ministry to the people who are not fit to be given example nehru . and by doing that mistake he made whole country repent from past 60 years and the same story is repeating . if the ministry or the power went into some other hands our countrys position would be far better .